Since its enactment in 2020, employers have been forced to be mindful of the burdensome imposition of Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.97 et seq., which requires an employer to pay the full amount of arbitration fees...more
Employers throughout California have been keenly awaiting the final decision from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals regarding the United States Chamber of Commerce’s challenge to California Labor Code section 432.6,...more
Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) actions are the proverbial boogeyman to California employers. On June 15, 2022, the United States Supreme Court reined in some of this statute’s bite by holding that “aggrieved...more
Since the California Supreme Court’s ruling in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC in 2014, it has been widely understood that Private Attorneys’ General Act (“PAGA”) actions cannot be subject to employment...more
Businesses and attorneys alike have kept a close eye on the developments surrounding the challenge to California Assembly Bill 51 (now codified as Labor Code section 432.6). Most recently, in a 2-1 decision, the 9th Circuit...more
12/28/2021
/ Appeals ,
Arbitration ,
Arbitration Agreements ,
Chamber of Commerce ,
Employer Liability Issues ,
Employment Contract ,
Federal Arbitration Act ,
Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure ,
Mandatory Arbitration Clauses ,
Petition For Rehearing ,
Preemption ,
Preliminary Injunctions ,
State Labor Laws
Since the turn of the century, the judicial and legislative branches in California have added barrier after barrier to employers who have consciously sought arbitration; an oft-stated “preferred” method of resolution. The...more
In a year of tough decisions for California employers, the Ninth Circuit just issued another mixed bag of legal decisions to navigate, this time regarding the enforceability of mandatory arbitration agreements.
CA Labor...more